Archive for the ‘Iglesia ni Cristo-Manalo’ Category

Ang panagbangi sa PASUGO sa Iglesia ni Cristo nga gitukod ni Felix Manalo nagpaila sa ilang pagka pirated nga Iglesia ni Cristo.
Gipanghimakak sa Iglesia ni Manalo nga nakadawat silag ayudang panalapi gikan sa gawas sa atong nasod alang sa ilang mga kapilya. PASUGO July 1997, p. 10: “the Iglesia has supported itself purely with its own resources from the start, entirely without outside assistance. As Brother Erdy has emphasized, ‘all our chapels, from the smallest to the biggest, have been built through the voluntary contributions of our brethren, with the grace of God. Not a single centavo has come from a foreign source.”Apan ang Pasugo July 1964, p. 182, nag-angkon nga miadto si Felix Manalo sa America aron pagpangitag pundo alang sa ilang main chapel: “Felix Manalo sailed for America with the secretary of the Church at the time, Cirilo Gonzales. The secretary was to act as intrpreter for the executive minister, who was supposed to deliver a series of lectures in Indiana. Thus did the religious leader hope to raise funds for a main chapel of the Iglesia ni Cristo.”

OPEN LETTER TO AN IGLESIA NI CRISTO MEMBER

November 24, 2004

MR. ZEUS ANTHONY ORDINAL

Intel Technology MFG

Bangkal, Makati City

Dear Zeus:

Thank you for your message in response to mine. It is with a heavy heart that this will have to be my last post in this e-group. I may not have the time anymore to monitor all my mails because I will already devote my time and energy in my apostolate as a full-time lay evangelist of the Church. In this way, I will be able to respond to the Great Commission: “Make disciples of all the nations” (Mt. 28:19). But before I make my graceful exit, let me say my piece.

Firstly, I thank you wholeheartedly for some of your pointed comments regarding the Catholic Church. I tried as much as I can to understand your position. I must admit in all candor that, in a certain degree, my exchange of messages with you as well as with other members of the group, was personally rewarding and enriching. The reasons are as follows:

1.I was able to speak out what the Catholic Church teaches and believes on certain issues.

2.I defended the Church to what I perceive to be inaccurate and baseless accusations.

3.I gave you the chance to speak out what you and the INC believe on certain issues.

4.I had the chance to ask you questions regarding your faith. (Although, I have not elicited satisfactory answers from you.)

5.I was able to more or less assess the reasons why you left the Catholic Church. This gave me the insight to formulate pastoral strategies for Catholics who are on the verge of leaving the Flock of Christ.

The exchange of points of view was educative to me, and I hope it was to you. I must admit that there were things that you said that I consider as “eye opener” for me. I now know the motivations and the reasons why you left the Catholic Church. Your honesty in revealing to me the reasons why you left the Catholic Church is noteworthy.

Allow me to respond to you regarding this matter briefly. I will quote your own words so that I can be fair and objective in my reply. When it cannot be avoided, allow me to rephrase your sentences for purposes of clarity, without, however, twisting or changing their meaning. I need to do this because of the oftentimes ungrammatical construction of your sentences. To be honest, there were times that I could not make sense of what you were saying because of your faulty syntax, wrong grammar, bad diction and imprecise expression of your thoughts. In addition, your logic is problematic. Your messages were replete with fallacious reasoning. These fallacies include hasty generalization, circulus in probando, argumentum ad hominem, argumentum ad ignorantiam, argumentum ad mesirecordiam, genetic fallacy and assumptio non probata. You virtually violated all the rules of logical argumentation. But I don’t fault you for that. You are honest enough to admit that you are not a genius. Nor am I. I had my share of lapses, too. Human as we are, we are capable of committing mistakes, in grammar or otherwise.

I understand that you were a Catholic for 24 years before you converted to the INC. You even mentioned that you went to Mass voluntarily, without being forced by your parents. That was so good of you! I admire you for that. I wish Catholics of our generation would have the same attitude as yours.

However, it saddened me when you likewise mentioned that you went to Church to have a date with your girlfriend or just because it was your birthday. You went to Church for the wrong motivations. Many Catholics are doing that, too. I just hope and pray that Catholics who go to Mass will fully appreciate the treasure that is the Eucharist. In this regard, religious education is most needed. Thank you for letting me know this. Indeed, there are a lot of things that need to be done to remedy the situation. It is herein where I a can step up my help to educate Catholics on their Faith, the “faith that is once and for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).

You mentioned also in your post that you only hear “one or two verses from the Bible” during the Mass. I don’t think that you have hearing impairment. I pointed out that you were wrong on this regard. Yet, you did not admit you made a mistake and apologize for such mistake. I said that it takes a little humility to accept that we made a mistake. We need not justify our mistake. To do so would be pride. The Apostle Peter says: “God resists the proud, and gives grace to the humble” (1 Pet. 5:5).

When I pointed out to you our need for humility, you countered by unabashedly telling me that you know the meaning of humility and I didn’t have to explain it to you. What attitude is this? I thought that when you converted to the INC, you would be a better person — more contrite, more humble. It seems to me that your being an INC now has not helped you a bit, at least in this aspect. Your church, sad to say, failed to reform you on this. Again, knowing what humility is, and practicing it are two different things. A person who knows humility should practice humility. Otherwise, it’s hypocrisy.

I asked you in one of my posts that you be accurate in your allegations. I mentioned that what is not the whole truth is a lie. I pointed out the falsity of your allegation that there are only 1 or two verses from the Bible during the Mass. I called your attention to John 8:44, which says: “You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.”

Instead of you admitting that you were wrong and be sorry, you had the temerity to justify yourself by saying that “Liars are the son’s of Satan but those who denied the Truth are much worst (sic) than a liar.” What a shocking statement from a member of the Church of Christ! I doubt it if this is what your church teaches you. If it does, it is teaching you an unscriptural doctrine.It has no basis in the Word of God whatsoever.

Zeus, your statement reveals your thinking process. You must by now realize the absurdity of that statement. One who denies the truth is a liar in as much the same way as one who does not tell the truth. Notice the circularity of your statement. Indeed, your statement is illogical as it is unscriptural. You owe it to your church to recant that statement; otherwise I will forever hold the impression that it was your church that taught you that.

You made the sweeping and plainly gratuitous assertion that“there are many things happening (sic) inside your church that are not based on the Bible.” I asked you to be more specific. You failed to do so. What exactly are these things in the Catholic Church that are not in the Bible? As far as I’m concerned, we never teach and do things that are not based in the Bible. I can prove this, on purely Biblical grounds, point by point. On the other hand, it’s Manalo’s church that teaches and practices things that are not in the Bible. In other words, your church teaches and practices things concocted and fabricated by your recognized “Sugo,” the angel Felix Y. Manalo. Your very own church admits this.

Go get your own copy of your Pasugo. I have here with me an old copy of the Pasugo, May 1961 issue. In page 4 thereof, it says:

You know, Zeus, in my exchanges with you, I raised so many points that you did not meet head-on. I asked you questions that you did not answer. I got so disappointed because I expected much from you, a member of the Iglesia ni Cristo. I thought that the INC has the Truth. I am of the impression that the INC has failed to communicate to you that Truth which it claims to have in its possession.

I wanted to engage you in those points and questions. But what I got were evasions, shifting from one issue to the next, but leaving the previous ones hanging. It seems to me that you are no far better in the INC than you were in the Catholic Church. You still do not know your doctrines in the INC in the same manner that you did not know the teachings of the Catholic Church.

I asked you to answer my questions and meet the points I raised. You refused to be focused on the topic at hand. What I got from you were evasions. I didn’t get what I wanted. I was (and still am) frustrated. I was asking you to account for what you now believe as an INC. I got nothing substantial from you. Zero, nada, zilch! In 1 Peter 3:15, we are told to “be ready to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason for the hope that is in you…” In all honesty, can you really say that you did what Apostle Peter asked you to do?

You candidly admitted that you left the Catholic Church because you don’t understand a lot of its teachings. If you don’t understand its teachings, you have no reason to criticize it now? What right have you to deride the things that you do not know? In Jude 10 we read: “Datapuwat ang mga ito’y nangaalipusta sa anomang bagay na hindi nila nalalaman…” And also in 2 Peter 2:12, we read:

In your pathetic attempt to justify your gross ignorance of Catholic teachings, you tauntingly asked the question, “who’s (sic) fault is that… is it mine?” Again, this reveals the mental paradigm on which you operate. This mentality is so reflective of Cain’s attitude who justified his murderous deed by tauntingly questioning the Lord: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Gen. 4:9). We don’t shift our own responsibility to someone else. That attitude is reflective of that of Adam and Eve after the fall. Adam, though himself guilty, shifted the blame to Eve by saying, “The woman whom you gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat” (Gen. 3: 12). Eve, for her part, shifted the blame to the serpent by saying, “The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat” (Gen. 3:13). But notice the justice of God! ALL were judged accordingly.

I say it with a heavy heart but I say it nonetheless: your attitude is very much like them. You justify your own culpable negligence and ignorance by pointing your finger to the Catholic priests. Granting for the sake of argument that the priests failed to educate you (just like the ministers of the INC who failed to educate you now that you are with them), why did you not exercise your own initiative? It seems that you want to be spoon-fed. That can possibly explain the reason why you converted to the INC because you found there what you’ve always wanted: to be spoon-fed. Everything is given to you cut and dried. On the contrary, the Bible teaches us the value of initiative and encourages it. Apostle Paul, in 2 Corinthians 9:2, says:

There you go! You lacked initiative. You were just waiting to be spoon-fed. You are an illustration of the classical Juan Tamad character, who waits for the guava fruit to fall into your mouth. If that is not laziness, negligence, irresponsibility or dereliction, I don’t know what is.

Apostle Paul reminds us: “That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises” (Hebrews 6:12).

Your parents, too, had the share in educating you. The first school is the home. Will you accept the fact that your parents likewise failed to educate you and provide you with proper Christian upbringing?

I am not justifying the priests. Far from it. They are accountable to God for their own faults and failures. Indeed, to whom much is given, much is expected (Luke 12:48). Priests will be judged accordingly by God. But still, that does not excuse you. If they failed to teach you and still you did not do something, you cannot shift the blame on them because you are responsible for your own salvation. In Philippians 2:12, we are instructed: “work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”

It is indeed a pity that, after having seen the Church in chaos, you did nothing to help. You just abandoned ship! Where were you when the Church needed you most? You turned your back away from her and left her. That is self-centeredness, cowardice and sheer opportunism. Abraham Lincoln said: “Ask not what your government can do to you, but what you can do to your government.” The same principle applies to religion as well: “Ask not what your Church can do to you but what you can do to the Church.” You are as guilty as the priests you accuse.

When a burglar enters our house, we don’t run away. We alert the police, apprehend the malefactor and set our household to its rights again. When we see our house on fire, we just don’t leave it. We call the firefighter to put out the fire. The bottom line is: DO SOMETHING! That you failed to do. You left your Church for another. In 2 Timothy 4:3-4, we read:

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”

Indeed, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel” (Gal. 1:6).

I can prove based on the Bible and your own Pasugo that your church preaches another gospel. In fact, just in case you do not realize, your church preaches Manalo essentially as “another Christ”. For example, your Pasugo of July 1965,in page 12, without compunction or shame, blasphemously states:

“Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
For wheresoever the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together” (Matthew 24:23-28).

In Mark 13:21-23, the Lord likewise said:

“And then if any one say to you, Lo, here [is] the Christ, or Lo, there, believe it not. For false Christs and false prophets will arise, and give signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. But do ye take heed: behold, I have told you all things beforehand.”

The church that you joined is a church founded by someone who claims to be an angel. Now Zeus, listen to what Apostle Paul cautions us: “But though we, or anangel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:8-9).

I thought that when you converted to the INC, you have found the truth. It seems to me, however, that that is not the case. If that were so, you will not say such things as “Liars are the sons of Satan and those who denied the truth are much worst than liars” and “The Bible was written by the apostles and prophets through the Wisdom of God”. Did your church really teach you such unbiblical assertions? If so, your church is teaching you unscriptural doctrines. If not, why are you mentioning things not taught to you by your church? Your church failed to educate you. And you are giving your church a bad reputation. You are not a credit to the Iglesia ni Cristo. Are you the kind of fruit the INC turned you to be? If you are, you are not something to be proud of by the INC. If the INC failed to change you, you are simply incorrigible. “By their fruits you shall know them” (Matt. 7:16).

In one of you posts, you asked: “Who told you that the RCC [Roman Catholic Church] gave us the Bible?”.I will let Martin Luther answer that:

“We are compelled toconcedetothePapiststhattheyhavetheWordofGod, thatwereceived it from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of it at all.” [Emphasis added and underscoring supplied]

Even the very life story of your Sugo confirms this. In the May-June 1986 issue of the Pasugo, in page 7 thereof, reveals:

“In 1900, the cousins stayed in the parish house in Sampaloc, Manila, where the parish priest was an uncle, Mariano Borja…

It was in that parish house where Felix Manalo found a Bible, which he began to read to find passages confirming his religious beliefs…” [Emphasis added and underscoring supplied]

Had it not been for the Catholic Church, Manalo could not have had the chance of reading the Bible. Thanks to the Roman Catholic Church!

Secondly,did your church really teach you, based on your own words that the Bible “was written by the apostles and prophets through the Wisdom of God”? You know how flawed that is. Questions:

1.Was the Bible written only by Apostles and Prophets? Mark and Luke wrote their Gospels, but where they apostles? Were Ruth and Esther prophets? What about the Judges? Was King Solomon a prophet? What about Joshua? What about the writers of 1 and 2 Kings and 1 and 2 Chronicles? These questions you failed to answer. The INC failed to teach you in this regard.

2.You mentioned the “Wisdom of God”. What is the Wisdom of God? Is it an attribute of God? Is it a Person? Is the Wisdom of God the same as the Logos? What does your church say about it?

3.Did, as you mentioned, the apostles and prophets wrote the Bible through the Wisdom of God, or is it the other way around? Could it be that God wrote the Scriptures through the apostles and prophets and the other inspired writers of the Bible?

I already answered your question with regard to where the Bible came from. You just seem to fail not to get the point. Is it really that hard to understand, or you just refuse to understand?

I stated that there is no debate that God DID GIVE us the Bible. The question is, HOW did God give us the Bible? Did God give us the Bible straight from heaven? Did the Bible fall from heaven straight into our hands? You and I fully know that such is not the case.

Again, let it be stated anew that the Catholic Church believes that the Bible is inerrant. The Bible is God-breathed or inspired. We fully hold the INSPIRATION and INERRANCY of the Bible. 1 Timothy 3:16 states that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God…” We don’t contest that. What we are saying is, though the Bible has God for its author, God used human agency, the human authors of the Bible. He inspired them to write what He wanted written, but did not dictate on them. Inspiration is in no wise the same as dictation. God did not interfere with the skills, style and talents of the human authors, but made use of them to accomplish His divine purpose. In this sense, God indeed GAVE us the Bible, but He graciously involved human authors in writing down the books of the Bible. The books of the Bible are inspired and given by God. But WHO decided that only the books that are now included in the Bible are to be included therein? There were more than a hundred writings to select from. Here is where God made use of the Catholic Church. The Councils of the Catholic Church, in Laodicea (362 AD), Hippo (397 AD) and Carthage (419 AD) came in. The INC teaches that the Catholic Church apostatized in 325 AD in the Council of Nicaea. Why did God allow the apostate Catholic Church to determine the canonicity and authenticity of the 27 New Testament Books? The INC calls the Catholic Church the “synagogue of Satan”. Why would God allow the synagogue of Satan to pass upon the canonicity and authenticity of the Bible in Satan’s Councils? In 1 Corinthians 10:21, Apostle Paul says: “You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils; you cannot partake of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.” In Ephesians 4:17, we read: “Neither give place to the devil.” Finally, in 2 Corinthians 6:14-15, Apostle Paul asks: “For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever?”.

The very nagging question screaming for an answer is this: Why would Satan’s church have a say in listing down which books should be included in the Word of God?

I asked you to ask your ministers the following questions:

1.If the Catholic Church apostatized in 325 AD in the Council of Nicaea, what authority did it have in 362, 397 and 419 AD in deciding which books are to be included in the canon?

2.Where in the Bible can we find from Genesis to Revelation a Table of Contents enumerating the books to be included in the Bible?

3.Where in the Bible does it say that the books and only the books that are now included in the Bible are inspired?

I was appalled when you told me that I should ask your ministers myself. Can’t you ask your ministers? Are you afraid to ask them?

At any rate, to be honest with you, I already did what you told me to do. To my chagrin, all I got were evasive replies, non-responsive answers and even insults. The reason why I asked you to ask them for me is because I thought that if an INC member like you would ask them, they would be honest in their answers. I hate to say this but I am now convinced that INC ministers are what the Apostle Paul refers to as “mapagkunwaring ministro” in 2 Corinthians 11:15:

Instead of answering my questions and meeting the points I raised, you switched on to ask me if there are INC ministers who converted to the Catholic Church.

Why would an INC minister, with very fat salary and allowances, as well as other emoluments and perks, convert to a Church that can’t give them the same material rewards and benefits? Like the rich young man in the parable (Mark 10:17-27), your ministers would rather cling to the materially bountiful and convenient life they have in the INC. Indeed, “what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul?” (Mark 8:36).

Harsh words? Perhaps. But your own Executive Minister, Eraňo G. Manalo, had the same, if not harsher, words for your ministers:

Apostle Paul warns of those “whose God is their belly” (Phil. 3:19). “For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple” (Romans 16:18).

This is what I mean by looking at your own backyard. The Lord Jesus said: “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again” (Matthew 7:1-2). And, “And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given” (Mark 4:24).

This I have to tell you. Yes, I know of INC ministers who converted to the Catholic Church. Deacons and deaconesses are included. But your church wouldn’t tell you that. Your church wouldn’t admit that. In fact, it even says that they were not even INCs, but they were excommunicated (“tiniwalag”). Funny, is it not? If they were not members of the INC in the first place, why would they be excommunicated?

I also have a friend who converted from the INC to the Catholic Church who is now a member of the Opus Dei. His brother is also an INC minister. He asked his brother why he continues to stay in the INC even if he himself does not anymore believe in INC doctrines. His brother’s reply was: “Why, can you give me everything that I am enjoying now? Can you feed my children and send them to school? Can you raise my family?” There you go! I can name names. But since this is a public group, I will withhold their names for their own protection. I have their sworn statements, though. You know how the ex-INCs are treated by your Church. They are persecuted, ostracized and harassed. I have newspaper clippings as well as personal testimonies of excommunicated INCs to prove this.

Then again, I believe that your question is picayune and irrelevant. It is otiose to talk about it, especially if your purpose is proving that your church is the one true Church. I have a better question. Has there ever been a member of the INC who got killed for his faith? Has there ever been a member of the INC since 1914 to the present who died a martyr’s death? Your answer is as good as mine. There is NONE. That should bother you. The true Church of Christ is the Church of martyrs as can be seen in Revelation 7:9-17. Even your “Last Messenger” and Founder did not die a martyr’s death. Do you know how he died? His death was like that of Judas.The May-June 1986 issue of the Pasugo, of which I have a copy, admits in page 21 thereof:

“On April 2, the doctors worked on Manalo again to sue back part of his intestines which had burstand hemorrhaged. On April 11, they performed a third surgery on him. It proved to be the last.”

Notice the striking resemblance with the death of that of Judas: “he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.” In Ang Biblia, it says: “pumutok siya sa gitna at sumambulat ang lahat ng laman ng kanyang tiyan” (Acts 1: 18).

There’s another similar death if you care to read History. His name is Arius.

Indeed, “it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” Heb. 10:31.

Still talking about God’s Messenger, the angel Felix Y. Manalo, I raised the issue of Rosita Trillanes in my earlier posts in this e-group. I documented my statements, citing the case of People versus Trillanes, published in the Official Gazette, Volume I, No. 1, July 1954, p. 394, docketed as Case No. 8180, April 21, 1942. I have the decision photocopied from the Official Gazette, as well as the “advance sheet” authenticated by the Court of Appeals.

As I stated, I am not concerned in whether or not God’s Last Messenger did molest dozens of women. I am more after an answer to the question: Why did God’s Last Messenger who re-established Christ’s Church in the Philippines sue a member of the church in a Gentile or pagan court? I asked this because that contravened 2 Corinthians 6:1. Again, no answer was given.

When I raised the issue on Rosita Trillanes, someone in this group responded to me by posting the purported “retraction” of Trillanes. I pointed out that said retraction does not serve any fathomable legal purpose whatsoever. A recantation, retraction or desistance should be executed and filed before the prosecution files a criminal information in court. In the Trillanes case, however, that cannot be legally possible, for the following reasons:

1.Manalo was the private complainant. He should have been the one who executed and filed an affidavit of desistance or retraction.

2.The case was already filed in court. In fact, the case reached the Court of Appeals where Trillanes was acquitted. The appellate court upheld Trillanes and categorically called Manalo “a man of low morals” (“un hombre de baja moral’).

3.The retraction was executed by Trillanes many years after the dismissal of the case.

The person who furnished me the alleged text of the retraction berated me and told me to leave Trillanes alone because “matagal nang namayapa si Kapatid na Trillanes” and “masigasig siyang naglingkod sa Iglesia bilang diaconesa hanggang sa kanyang kamatayan.” The point that Trillanes remained a deaconess until her death, after the scandal that she caused, struck me. Why would a self-confessed liar be allowed to serve in the church as deaconess?In 1 Timothy 3:10, Apostle Paul provides the qualifications for the office of deacon: “And let these also be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderer, sober, faithful in all things.” You consider a self-confessed liar blameless? Manalo himself considered Trillanes a libeler, in fact he filed a criminal case against her for libel. Then, why would she be appointed as deaconess even if she does not qualify as one who is “not a slanderer.”? You consider a conspirator against the church like Trillanes as “faithful in all things”? The doubt continues to linger in the air that her retraction can be construed as a quid pro quo for her position as deaconess. This is not to mention the undue influence and tremendous power Manalo formidably wielded during that time, both as the Sugo, Founderand Executive Minister of his church.

Zeus, in one of your posts, you mentioned about the “chaos in the Catholic Church.” Come to think about it, this chaos that we experience is Our Lord’s way of purifying His Church. It is part of the growth pains of the Church, the Bride of Christ. The Bible teaches us that pain is essential to growth. God never promised that things would be easy for His Church. The Church which undergoes such experience is the one true Church. Apostle Paul says:

“We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken, cast down, but not destroyed” (2 Cor. 4:8-10).

In fact, the happenings in the Catholic Church can be said to be God’s way of chastising her because He loves her. God chastises whom He loves. In Hebrews 12:6-11, the Apostle to the Gentiles emphasizes this point:

“For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them. For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but He for our profit, that we might be partakers of his Holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.”

The Catholic Church appears to be weak because of its problems. But, as Apostle Paul says: “And He had said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness. Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may dwell in me. Therefore, I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ’s sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong.” (2 Cor. 12: 9-10).

In your last message to me, you asked: “If you believe that all this things are necessary in your Catholic faith then why do Millions of Catholic around the world or just even here in the Philippines don’t know about this Facts that you wish us to Know? You believe that your church has the complete doctrines of Christ and GOD then what is happening to your Church? And to the whole world?”

I think I already partially answered your question. But let me expound. First, God did not promise a bed of roses for His Church. Remember what Our Lord said? “Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also” (John 15:20).

Perhaps, you should read the Parable of the Sower:

“And when much people were gathered together, and were come to him out of every city, he spake by a parable: a sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it. And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear” (Luke 8:4-8).

Yes, we preach these “facts”. But as the parable says, some fell on the way side, some on the rock, and some among the thorns. That is why millions, as you said, do not know these. That is Biblical. But do not forget that millions, too, know about these.

Siguro itatanong mo kung bakit parehas may matino at di-matinong mga Katoliko. Hayaan natin, Kapatid, na Biblia ang sumagot niyan. Just read the parable of the weeds among the wheat in Matthew 13:24-30 and the parable of the net that catches both good and bad fish in Matthew 13:47-48.

Another reason why, as you said, there are “millions” who do not know these things, is because there are only very few priests left to do the task. There is a crisis in priestly vocations in the Catholic Church. This is also prophesied by the Lord in the Bible. Let us read Luke 10:2:

“Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest.”

You mentioned so many things regarding the Catholic priests. Some may be guilty but not all. Besides, your own ministers in the INC are as contemptible, if not more, than the Catholic priests you revile. Read for yourself the transcript of the complaint of your very own Executive Ministers against his own ministers, thus:

“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye” (Matthew 7:3-5).

In my exchanges with you, my arguments were all based on facts. You yourself admitted these facts. Zeus, against facts, no argument is valid. But why don’t you face these facts? It takes monumental blindness not to see these facts. Mas mahirap nga talaga yatang gisingin angtaong nagtutulog-tulogan kaysa sa talagang tulog. Mas mahirap makakita ang taong nagbubulag-bulagan kaysa sa talagang bulag. Are you afraid to face reality? What are you afraid of? Truth? “Fear not: For I am with you” (Isaiah 43:5). Be not afraid! Go where the truth leads you!

I asked you to do some reading on the History of the Church and the Bible. However, you seem not to welcome the idea. Again, are you afraid of what you will find out? There’s absolutely no reason for this paranoia. There’s much for you to know and learn. As I said, it will be rewarding and enriching for you, as it was for me. Indeed, there’s much for you to study, grammar and logic included.

Zeus, you mentioned that we have the facts. Yes we do. Not only that, we do have the Truth, the fullness of Truth. Notice the acronym of your church: INC. INC, in collegiate grading system, means INCOMPLETE. On the other hand, “Catholic” comes from the Greek word “kata holos” which means “according to the whole.” The whole truth, and nothing but the truth, is in the Catholic Church.

You taunted me that if we have the facts, why don’t we tell that to our members? I have good news for you. Yes, we are telling that to our members. Our efforts may not be enough so far, but at least we are doing something, no matter how little. We can only do our best, and God will do the rest.

I admit that, like you, many of our members do not know much about our doctrines. I already explained to you, based on the Bible, the reasons why. Then again, that is the reason why evangelization is of utmost importance especially now where sects like yours are active in proselytizing. As prophesied in the Bible, there is famine for hearing the word of God. In Amos 8:11-12, we read:

“Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine for bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord.”

See? Even this famine in the Church and in the world that you mentioned is itself prophesied in the Bible.

The facts stare at you in the face. But you refuse to face them. In Mark 8:17-18, we read: “…perceive ye not yet, neither understand? have ye your heart yet hardened? Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not?”.

Zeus, I am responding to you not to quarrel with you. “Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” (Gal. 4:16). My task is to “speak the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15). “Therefore, laying aside falsehood, speak truth, each one of you, with his neighbor, for we are members of one another” (Eph. 4:25). Now, if I hurt you in any way, I am sorry but I don’t mean to. Truth really hurts. But, “you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32). I believe that God can lead you to the truth. Apostle Paul states: “In meekness, instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will” (2 Tim. 2:25-26).

Umaasa ako na sana katulad ka ng mga taga-Berea na sinisiyasat araw-araw ang mga kasulatan kung tunay nga ang mga bagay na ito (cf. Gawa 17:11). Search the Scriptures daily to determine if these things were so (Acts 17:11). This, however, will be problematic for you because your church prohibits you from reading for yourself the Bible, as stated in your Pasugo, October 1995, page 4:

“The Bible or the word of God is a “mystery which was kept secret.” Thus, it is no ordinary book that could be understood or interpreted by just anybody who can read. This is why apostle Paul quipped: “Always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of truth.” (II Tim. 3:7). But many people have thought that they could understand the Bible by themselves.”

Brod, why would the Organization prohibit you from reading the Bible by yourself? Are those in the Central Administration afraid that the Bible will expose who they are? He who does evil hates the light (John 3:19-20).Why are they suppressing the truth? In Romans 1:18, we read:

“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness.”

Brother Zeus, you ought to make a choice. It’s either you continue to be under the yoke or bondage of the Organization or to choose freedom. In Galatians 6:1, Apostle Paul cautions us to “stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.”

I hope and pray that you can begin to retrace your steps and start your journey back to your original home. I know that the road to Rome for you will not be easy. But it is where you can truly find your brethren. Inaasahan ko na sa iyong paglalakbay ay makakarating ka muli saRoma at doo’y makakasumpong ka ng iyong mga kapatid. Gaya ni Apostol Pablo at kaniyang mga kasama:

Again, go where the truth leads you. If that truth will lead you back to “Rome sweet home,” so be it. As one love song says, “Love will lead you back…” Zeus, come to think of it, love is lovelier the second time around.

Zeus, “keep testing whether you are in the faith” (2 Cor. 13:5). “Prove all things” (1 Thess. 5:21). Go where the truth leads you. “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32).

The Iglesia ni Cristo (Tagalog, “Church of Christ“) claims to be the true Church established by Christ. Felix Manalo, its founder, proclaimed himself God’s prophet. Many tiny sects today claim to be the true Church, and many individuals claim to be God’s prophet. What makes Iglesia ni Cristo different is that it is not as tiny as others.

Since it was founded in the Philippines in 1914, it has grown to more than two hundred congregations in sixty-seven countries outside the Philippines, including an expanding United States contingent. The Iglesia keeps the exact number of members secret, but it is estimated to be between three million and ten million worldwide. It is larger than the Jehovah’s Witnesses, a better known sect (which also claims to be Christ’s true Church). Iglesia is not better known, despite its numbers, because the majority of Iglesia’s members are Filipino. Virtually the only exceptions are a few non-Filipinos who have married into Iglesia families.

The organization publishes two magazines, Pasugo and God’s Message, which devote most of their energies toward condemning other Christian churches, especially the Catholic Church. The majority of the Iglesia’s members are ex-Catholics. The Philippines is the only dominantly Catholic nation in the Far East, with eighty-four percent of its population belonging to the Church. Since this is its largest potential source of converts, Iglesia relies on anti-Catholic scare tactics as support for its own doctrines, which cannot withstand biblical scrutiny. The Iglesia tries to convince people of its doctrines not by proving they are right, but by attempting to prove the Catholic Church’s teachings are wrong.

Is Christ God?

The Catholic teaching that most draws Iglesia’s fire is Christ’s divinity. Like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Iglesia claims that Jesus Christ is not God but a created being.

Yet the Bible is clear: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). We know Jesus is the Word because John 1:14 tells us, “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” God the Father was not made flesh; it was Jesus, as even Iglesia admits. Jesus is the Word, the Word is God, therefore Jesus is God. Simple, yet Iglesia won’t accept it.

In Deuteronomy 10:17 and 1 Timothy 6:15, God the Father is called the “Lord of lords,” yet in other New Testament passages this divine title is applied directly to Jesus. In Revelation 17:14 we read, “They will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings.” And in Revelation 19:13–16, John sees Jesus “clad in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. . . . On his thigh he has a name inscribed, King of kings and Lord of lords.”

The fact that Jesus is God is indicated in numerous places in the New Testament. John 5:18 states that Jewish leaders sought to kill Jesus “because he not only broke the Sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God.” Paul also states that Jesus was equal with God (Phil. 2:6). But if Jesus is equal with the Father, and the Father is a God, then Jesus is a God. Since there is only one God, Jesus and the Father must both be one God—one God in at least two persons (the Holy Spirit, of course, is the third person of the Trinity).

The same is shown in John 8:56–59, where Jesus directly claims to be Yahweh (“I AM”). “‘Your father Abraham rejoiced that he was to see my day; he saw it and was glad.’ The Jews then said to him, ‘You are not yet fifty years old, and you have seen Abraham?’ Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.’ So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple.” Jesus’ audience understood exactly what he was claiming; that is why they picked up rocks to stone him. They considered him to be blaspheming God by claiming to be Yahweh.

The same truth is emphasized elsewhere. Paul stated that we are to live “awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13). And Peter addressed his second epistle to “those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours in the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 1:1).

Jesus is shown to be God most dramatically when Thomas, finally convinced that Jesus has risen, falls down and exclaims, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28)—an event many in Iglesia have difficulty dealing with. When confronted with this passage in a debate with Catholic Answers founder Karl Keating, Iglesia apologist Jose Ventilacion replied with a straight face, “Thomas was wrong.”

God’s Messenger?

A litmus test for any religious group is the credibility of its founder in making his claims. Felix Manalo’s credibility and, consequently, his claims, are impossible to take seriously. He claimed to be “God’s messenger,” divinely chosen to re-establish the true Church which, according to Manalo, disappeared in the first century due to apostasy. It was his role to restore numerous doctrines that the Church had abandoned. A quick look at Manalo’s background shows where these doctrines came from: Manalo stole them from other quasi-Christian religious sects.

Manalo was baptized a Catholic, but he left the Church as a teen. He became a Protestant, going through five different denominations, including the Seventh-Day Adventists. Finally, Manalo started his own church in 1914. In 1919, he left the Philippines because he wanted to learn more about religion. He came to America, to study with Protestants, whom Iglesia would later declare to be apostates, just like Catholics. Why, five years after being called by God to be his “last messenger,” did Manalo go to the U.S. to learn from apostates? What could God’s messenger learn from a group that, according to Iglesia, had departed from the true faith?

The explanation is that, contrary to his later claims, Manalo did not believe himself to be God’s final messenger in 1914. He didn’t use the last messenger doctrine until 1922. He appears to have adopted the messenger doctrine in response to a schism in the Iglesia movement. The schism was led by Teogilo Ora, one of its early ministers. Manalo appears to have developed the messenger doctrine to accumulate power and re-assert his leadership in the church.

This poses a problem for Iglesia, because if Manalo had been the new messenger called by God in 1914, why didn’t he tell anybody prior to 1922? Because he didn’t think of it until 1922. His situation in this respect parallels that of Mormonism’s founder Joseph Smith, who claimed that when he was a boy, God appeared to him in a vision and told him all existing churches were corrupt and he was not to join them, that he would lead a movement to restore God’s true Church. But historical records show that Smith did join an inquirer’s class at an established Protestant church after his supposed vision from God. It was only in later years that Smith came up with his version of the “true messenger” doctrine, proving as much of an embarrassment for the Mormon church as Manalo’s similar doctrine does for Iglesia.

Iglesia Prophesied?

A pillar of Iglesia belief is that its emergence in the Philippines was prophesied in the Bible. This idea is supposedly found in Isaiah 43:5–6, which states, “Fear not, for I am with you; I will bring your offspring from the east, and from the west I will gather you; I will say to the north, ‘Give up,’ and the south, ‘Do not withhold; bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the end of the earth.’”

Iglesia argues that in this verse, Isaiah is referring to the “far east” and that this is the place where the “Church of Christ” will emerge in the last days. This point is constantly repeated in Iglesia literature: “The prophecy stated that God’s children shall come from the far east” (Pasugo, March 1975, 6).

But the phrase “far east” is not in the text. In fact, in the Tagalog (Filipino) translation, as well as in the original Hebrew, the words “far” and “east” are not even found in the same verse, yet the Iglesia recklessly combine the two verses to translate “far east.” Using this fallacious technique, Iglesia claims that the far east refers to the Philippines.

Iglesia is so determined to convince its followers of this “fact” that it quotes Isaiah 43:5 from an inexact paraphrase by Protestant Bible scholar James Moffatt that reads, “From the far east will I bring your offspring.” Citing this mistranslation, one Iglesia work states, “Is it not clear that you can read the words ‘far east’? Clear! Why does not the Tagalog Bible show them? That is not our fault, but that of those who translated the Tagalog Bible from English—the Catholics and Protestants” (Isang Pagbubunyag Sa Iglesia ni Cristo, 1964:131). The Iglesia accuses everyone else of mistranslating the Bible, when it is Iglesia that is taking liberties with the original language.

The Name Game

Iglesia points to its name as proof it is the true Church. They argue, “What is the name of Christ’s Church, as given in the Bible? It is the ‘Church of Christ.’ Our church is called the ‘Church of Christ.’ Therefore, ours is the Church Christ founded.”

Whether or not the exact words “Church of Christ” appear in the Bible is irrelevant, but since Iglesia makes it an issue, it is important to note that the phrase “Church of Christ” never once appears in the Bible.

The verse Iglesia most often quotes on this issue is Romans 16:16: “Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you ” (Pasugo, November 1973, 6). But the phrase in this verse is “churches of Christ.” And it’s not a technical name. Paul is referring to a collection of local churches, not giving an organizational name.

To get further “proof” of its name, Iglesia cites Acts 20:28: “Take heed therefore . . . to feed the church of Christ which he has purchased with his blood” (Lamsa translation; cited in Pasugo, April 1978). But the Lamsa translation is not based on the original Greek, the language in which the book of Acts was written. In Greek, the phrase is “the church of God” (tan ekklasian tou Theou) not “the church of Christ” (tan ekklasian tou Christou). Iglesia knows this, yet it continues to mislead its members.

Even if the phrase “church of Christ” did appear in the Bible, it would not help Iglesia’s case. Before Manalo started his church, there were already groups calling themselves “the Church of Christ.” There are several Protestant denominations that call themselves Church of Christ and use exactly the same argument. Of course, they aren’t the true Church for the same reason Iglesia isn’t—because they were not founded by Christ.

Did Christ’s Church Apostatize?

The doctrines upon which all Iglesia’s other doctrines depend is its teaching that Christ’s Church apostatized in the early centuries. Like Mormonism, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and other fringe groups, Iglesia asserts that the early Christian Church suffered a total apostasy. It believes in “the complete disappearance of the first-century Church of Christ and the emergence of the Catholic Church” (Pasugo, July-Aug. 1979, 8).

But Jesus promised that his Church would never apostatize. He told Peter, “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18). If his Church had apostatized, then the gates of hell would have prevailed against it, making Christ a liar.

In other passages, Christ teaches the same truth. In Matthew 28:20 he said, “I am with you always even until the end of the world.” And in John 14:16, 18 he said, “And I will pray to the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you forever … I will not leave you desolate.”

If Iglesia members accept the apostasy doctrine, they make Christ a liar. Since they believe Jesus Christ is not a liar, they are ignoring what Christ promised, and their doctrine contradicts Scripture.

They are, however, fulfilling Scripture. While Jesus taught that his Church would never apostatize, the Bible does teach that there will be a great apostasy, or falling away from the Church. Paul prophesies: “[Do not] be quickly shaken in mind or excited . . . to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come, unless the rebellion [Greek: apostasia] comes first” (2 Thess. 2:2–3); “Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons” (1 Tim. 4:1); and, “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own liking, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths” (2 Tim. 4:3–4). By falling away from the Church, members of Iglesia are committing precisely the kind of apostasy of which they accuse the Catholic Church.

The Bible tells us in 1 John 4:1: “Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are of God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world.” Was Felix Manalo a true prophet? Is his church the “true Church?” If we test the claims of Iglesia ni Cristo, the answer is apparent. His total apostasy doctrine is in flat contradiction to Christ’s teaching. There is no way that Iglesia ni Cristo can be the true Church of Christ.